Donald Wayne Lewis v. State
07-15-00061-CR
| Tex. App. | Nov 22, 2016Background
- Appellant Donald Wayne Lewis was indicted for burglary (with two prior-felony enhancements); after pretrial suppression rulings he waived a jury, was found guilty by the bench, enhancements found true, and sentenced to 45 years.
- Randall County investigated residential burglaries; victim Pastwa reported a red 1997 Suburban (with damage and a license plate) and a large black male fleeing; Pastwa could not identify Lewis in a photo lineup.
- An arrest warrant and a Parole Board “blue warrant” were issued based on the Pastwa affidavit; Randall County sent an advisory email to Amarillo PD identifying Lewis and the Suburban as evidence in the Pastwa burglary. The issuing magistrate’s probable-cause affidavit was later found to contain a reckless misrepresentation regarding identification.
- Amarillo officers independently observed the Suburban matching the advisory, stopped it in Potter County, arrested Lewis on the warrants, photographed and cursory-inspected the vehicle, and released it to Randall County (which later obtained a search warrant).
- A subsequent Randall County search warrant of the Suburban recovered items linking Lewis to a separate Coffman residence burglary (iPad, jewelry, coin-voucher receipt, photos). Lewis challenged suppression of the arrest warrant, the vehicle, and its contents; he also challenged sufficiency of the evidence.
- The trial court found the arrest warrant and blue warrant defective under Franks but held the vehicle seizure and items were admissible because officers had independent probable cause/suspicion and any removal to Randall County did not mandate exclusion; this court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Validity of arrest & blue warrants | Lewis: affidavit omitted and misrepresented ID evidence; warrants invalid; fruit of arrest must be suppressed | State: warrants invalid but officers had independent basis to act (advisory email/crime bulletin) and other doctrines justify seizure | Court: warrant defective under Franks, but suppression of vehicle/items not required because officers had independent probable cause/suspicion to stop and detain |
| 2. Lawfulness of vehicle seizure & subsequent search | Lewis: vehicle seizure and transfer tainted by invalid warrant; seizure/search must be suppressed | State: officers observed vehicle matching bulletin and had reasonable suspicion/probable cause; plain view/automobile exception/warrantless arrest authority apply | Court: stop and seizure lawful based on independent information; evidence admissible |
| 3. Removal of vehicle across counties and inventory/impound procedure | Lewis: transfer from Potter to Randall without magistrate order (Art. 18.10) and lack of impound/inventory requires exclusion under Art. 38.23 | State: vehicle was not seized pursuant to a search warrant; Martinez controls that Art. 38.23 exclusion does not apply to Art. 18.10 violations; movement does not vitiate lawful status | Court: Art. 18.10 inapplicable because not seized via search warrant; even if violated, exclusion not required; lack of formal impound/inventory did not mandate suppression |
| 4. Sufficiency of evidence for burglary conviction | Lewis: insufficient circumstantial evidence linking him to Coffman burglary | State: recovered items (iPad with victim photos, jewelry, receipt) plus Walmart video and failure to give credible explanation support inference of guilt | Court: evidence (circumstantial and appellant’s unsubstantiated explanation) sufficient under Jackson to support conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Cole v. State, 490 S.W.3d 918 (Tex. Crim. App.) (standard of review for suppression rulings)
- Keehn v. State, 279 S.W.3d 330 (Tex. Crim. App.) (deference to trial court fact findings and mixed questions)
- Valtierra v. State, 320 S.W.3d 442 (Tex. Crim. App.) (trial court as sole trier of credibility)
- Ramos v. State, 934 S.W.2d 358 (Tex. Crim. App.) (plain-view seizure principles)
- Wiede v. State, 214 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. Crim. App.) (probable cause standard for items as evidence)
- Martinez v. State, 17 S.W.3d 677 (Tex. Crim. App.) (movement of lawfully obtained evidence to another county does not require exclusion under Art. 38.23)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. Supreme Court) (sufficiency of the evidence standard)
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (U.S. Supreme Court) (preliminary showing required to challenge affidavit truthfulness)